Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Being sent home from new job after old job gave info on my previous employment

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,967 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    Tombo2001 wrote: »
    I think thats appalling.

    They accepted him out of a job where he was permanent, offered him a job, didnt do their homework on him before they took him on, and then sacked him based on what he had done in the past after they took him on.

    Really poor, in this day and age when people are struggling with mortgages, struggling with loan repayments and so on, to treat someones livelihood so flippantly is reckless.

    There are two sides to every story.

    Presumably he was asked at interview "why did you leave your last job" - and lied.


  • Options
    #33
    tatli_lokma
    Registered Users Posts: 3,332 ✭✭✭tatli_lokma


    JustMary wrote: »
    There are two sides to every story.

    Presumably he was asked at interview "why did you leave your last job" - and lied.
    As does everyone who leaves a job where they are unhappy or there was an incident. No one who expects to get a job will answer that question by saying 'well my boss was a tosser and I couldn't stand him'. That is why I don't bother asking that question - you will never get an honest answer. Better to ask, why are you applying for this job and what do you think you can get from this role that you could not get in your current/last role?

    barney 20v wrote: »
    We had a guy start with us and 4 weeks later he was called into a HR meeting and promptly dismissed !
    He had been involved in an incicident at his previous work that resulted in damage to property.
    We have since heard that although accidental, the damage was not owned up to by this guy or the two other people on that shift.
    All three were disciplined equally but not sacked.

    He got a start with us some six months later and someone rang up our HR and explained what had happened, he was removed from the building within 30 min.
    It seemed harsh to me as he seemed keen, skilled and likeable!
    He had gone through Four apptitude tests,five interviews and a medical, his references had been checked and verified and he had a full time contract in a position that more or less is a job for life!
    It happens OP and it happens in huge companys also.

    From Barney's quote he was involved with an 'incident' and neither he nor the others owned up to it. Perhaps they were not guilty, or there were mitigating circumstances and that is why they did not own up to it. They also were not sacked but disciplined - possibly because it could not be acertained who exactly caused the damage and due to it beig accidental. As you say, there are two sides to every story so I hope that this guy was given the right to reply, just as OP should have been given. I also hope that the old company had clear evidence of this alleged wrong doing and subsequent disciplinary and it was on the basis of having proof that they gave the negative reference - otherwise as you know this guy could indeed sue. And it seems that the new place DID check is references, was happy with them, but someone being vindictive phoned them and ratted him out. To sack someone on this basis would be very unfair. It could of course be that in the meeting with HR the guy admitted to something which in turn made it impossible to keep him on, but there is no way to know this.


Advertisement